1nv35t wrote:That wouldn't stop a 10%/year in public interest wealth tax on your worldwide assets/investments. Along with high inflation, crashing house prices - as good as confiscation but within the legal scope of the human rights act.

true

1nv35t wrote:A lot of that decline [sterling] however is the risk associated to the rise of Marxism.

Lootman wrote:Maybe so but, again, hasn't that been the case for the last 40 years? And haven't the voters continually rejected such shallow, envious and confiscatory ideologies?

Sure it could happen but then wouldn't we all just leave the UK, just like the Brain Drain of the 60's and 70's? And leave the great unwashed hoi polloi to tax themselves back into the stone age?

I agree with much that you have said on this subject. However, over the last 40 years the voters have not had the opportunity to alter the post 70s status quo. Blair, for all his faults, was essentially Thatcher light. Now, with Corbyn and crew, something radically different is on the table and it might just happen due to a large proportion of the electorate having no idea of the realities of life under socialism.

It's easier said than done to just move outside the UK with your assets - and I have been an expat for over 20 years. My plan is to retire back to the UK, hopefully within the next year, but I am tempted to wait and see. Unfortunately, I have been working in Middle Eastern and African countries where it is neither possible nor desirable to actually retire to.

I have a large pot of unsheltered money, which generates a pension amount that say a headteacher might expect. However, I will be viewed as 'rich' and this pot possibly taxed, whereas the headteacher will be safe. The only option that I can see if an 'extreme' wealth tax is introduced and I wish to remain in the UK is to bite the bullet and buy an annuity, knowing just how much the administrators are making off me in comparison with the income I was generating. Failing that, it's Costa Rica or Thailand!

Don't worry about real estate. Property prices will collapse if very high taxation is imposed. That will lead to massive negative equity, bad debts for the banks etc etc.

I suspect that even Corbyn & Co aren't so stupid as to impose a 10% wealth tax or reimpose 98% income tax immediately and so cause a collapse in the financial system.

But unless you actually move abroad, I think it will be difficult to shelter your assets simply, for example, by moving your shares to an overseas broker. Governments have long taxed overseas assets of UK residents.

Even when you do reside abroad, the taxman's long arm still reaches you. Domicile does not change simply because you leave the country.

Hopefully the British people will not be so stupid as to elect a momentum government, but when you consider what trash they watch on telly I'm not so sure!

ap8889 wrote:The trick is going to be getting a decent price as no doubt Corbyn will increasingly spook the markets as he marches the nation towards Marx.

and

scrumpyjack wrote:Hopefully the British people will not be so stupid as to elect a momentum government

I may as well comment that this is not a universally held understanding of the situation.

IMO Corbyn's march towards Marx is a symptom. Corbyn is the creation of the 2008 crash and specifically the mishandling of the economy by Osborne in its aftermath. Corbyn is Osborne's Frankenstein monster. We can hardly blame O personally because he always was economically clueless and was only installed in the job as a polical arrangement. Nevertheless, it would have been better seven years ago to adopt some of the ideas that the Tory party is contemplating now and will come to accept in future. Policies like the £50,000pa bung to people earning over £1m were nausiating and destructive to the long-term health of the economy. Why in the aftermath of a banking crisis should ordinary people like me be funding the private school fees of the super-rich while our own comprehensive schooling system is destroyed and elaborate scemes devised to funnel public education funding into the pockets of a few well-connected individuals [Carillion being the canary in the mine]? The pampering of the baby boomers is equally misguided. Their entire life has been gilded, and they are about to shuffle off -- they can give a bit back before they do. [EDIT - yeah I realise that's most people on Lemon Fool, LOL]

The Tories being in power have the opportunity to take the wind out of Corbyn's sails. If we don't want marxism we need to avoid creating the conditions that ferment marxism. People feel the injustice and oppression in their bones. That is why Corbyn is growing in popularity, and if the right wish to avoid it we might first recognise our own culpability, then implement some of the things Labour is suggesting and that the Tories will do later anyway (like nationalisation).

GSP.S. haven't even mentioned the referendums...P.P.S. Mods please move to LOST if unpalateable here. Only a certain strain of political comment is tolerated on the investing boards I know... certainly must not criticise the current lot...

scrumpyjack wrote:But unless you actually move abroad, I think it will be difficult to shelter your assets simply, for example, by moving your shares to an overseas broker. Governments have long taxed overseas assets of UK residents.

Even when you do reside abroad, the taxman's long arm still reaches you. Domicile does not change simply because you leave the country.

The concept of domicile, for those with UK domicile, really only comes into play upon death where HMRC could try and argue that your estate is subject to IHT even if both you and your estate are overseas.

How successful HMRC would be in collecting in that case is quite another matter, as they would have several obstacles to overcome:

1) How would they even know you had died, if that death was registered overseas?2) How would they collect given that foreign courts in most countries do not recognise foreign tax debts or court orders deriving from them.3) Probate would probably happen in that overseas country, under that country's laws, using a Will drafted in that other country. So that other country's tax authority would have the first crack at the estate, and the residue would be with the beneficiaries who HMRC would have no legitimate case against4) A prudent person might make gifts prior to death leaving HMRC with the thankless and probably futile task of chasing down foreigners who are quite entitled to ignore them.

So in practice I don't think the domicile issue is too serious. But I agree that if you remain resident in the UK then there are things the UK government could do to you even if your assets were all elsewhere.

Appoint Momentum thugs as Lords? Misguided old Labour voters, the proper working class and left leaning normal good people surely must see and take a note on every socialist country there ever was in Europe that one didn't simply travel and interact with people from other countries anymore.

It is also worrying that the Scandinavian social democracy model is not really discussed by this new labour but instead they seem to go the whole hog: Marxism and socialism.

I just can't believe, yet, that it is coming. But before the Marxist sect in Labour is marginalised, a lot of damage will be done.

1nv35t wrote: impose wealth tax only after all UK citizens worldwide wealth is locked/known, where residence overseas wouldn't exempt you from that, and where resigning domicile/citizenship might involve a period of years when you were still liable to UK taxation.

The US has such a system, i.e. it taxes based on citizenship as well as residency. There are some allowances and exemptions but essentially Uncle Sam comes after you wherever you are.

But that would involve a massive change to the UK tax system, so I'm not sure that would be an early priority for a Corbyn government. More a reaction to widespread evasion and allowance, which of course is very likely to happen.

Even so, there is the question of jurisdiction and enforcement. The US can just about enforce its draconian tax rules because it is a super-power that can project its laws and powers across borders, extradite it is own citizens from most other countries and has the resources and structures to pull that off. The UK government does not, and probably will have even fewer powers after Brexit.

So personally I don't worry about Corbyn attempting extra-territorial jurisdiction. With the exception of a few countries that might co-operate, I think that HMRC could not enforce collection. Worst case you might never again be able to enter the UK, in case you are detained at the border. But if the UK became that kind of police state, then I'd lose all interested in coming back here anyway.

Lootman wrote:... Worst case you might never again be able to enter the UK, in case you are detained at the border. But if the UK became that kind of police state, then I'd lose all interested in coming back here anyway.

Taxpayers living overseas are often misinformed or often conveniently forget about their US tax obligations. Many do not enter the US for years and are blissfully unaware that the IRS has taken action against them for unpaid tax liabilities that have been formally assessed. ... TECS allows the Department of Homeland Security to identify taxpayers with unpaid tax assessments who are traveling into the United States. It has been reported that such taxpayers are now more frequently being detained at the US entry border.

So far there are no reports of this being widespread. But procedural passport denial or revocation for US citizens with delinquent tax liabilities above $50k is just around the corner, and could easily become a serious issue for Americans living outside the US and without a second citizenship.

Would the UK ever devolve this far? It is easy to believe not. But then, a decade or two ago it was hard to imagine that the US would reach these depths. Yet it has.

Messy Brexit -> disrupted UK economy -> more people reliant on government payments -> increased support for Labour and generally taxing the rich $%&&£ who allowed us to inflict Brexit on ourselves...

This outcome is increasingly becoming the base case.

I think you’re spot on about “the rich... allowed us to inflict Brexit on ourselves”.

Wealthy, well-educated, politically engaged people generally voted for Remain (of course I accept you can be all of those things and vote to Leave, a la Mogg).

Conservatives also allowed the referendum to take place. Alas, I was both a Conservative party member and voter at that time so I take some blame.

And then, under the banner of “the people have spoken”, the elite on both sides of the House of Commons are making sure that Leave voters, the bulk of whom are poorer, less politically engaged and less well educated than average (again, admitting that there are many who are none of those three) are going to get their Brexit, good and hard and precisely where it hurts.

What do you think of the following? Many traditional working men (and women!) Labour voters, perhaps one could call them social democrats(?), Sweden is full of those, or was, they never wanted socialism but perhaps a bit steeper income tax rate progressive curve and what have you the usual multiple Scandinavian tax deductions for lower income earners (in Scandinavia/Nordic parties left of social democracy parties have perhaps a few per cent voters), I think traditional Labour voters haven't realised how the party has changed. Moderate social democracy values ditched, top rank party members saying words like Marxism and Socialism with straight faces. It's mind-boggling, read the history of eastern Europe and socialism, and this is now seriously advocated. Traditional Labour voters need to wake up - only the name of the party is the same.

Finances and property aside, are we allowed to keep our internet and smart phones? Travel permits to leave the country unless you're very high up the party hierarchy? Who wants to run a business? You get the same for less, so why bother? Momentum street patrols visiting households with suspicious activity?

I think you’re spot on about “the rich... allowed us to inflict Brexit on ourselves”.

Wealthy, well-educated, politically engaged people generally voted for Remain (of course I accept you can be all of those things and vote to Leave, a la Mogg).

Conservatives also allowed the referendum to take place. Alas, I was both a Conservative party member and voter at that time so I take some blame.

And then, under the banner of “the people have spoken”, the elite on both sides of the House of Commons are making sure that Leave voters, the bulk of whom are poorer, less politically engaged and less well educated than average (again, admitting that there are many who are none of those three) are going to get their Brexit, good and hard and precisely where it hurts.

Sad times.

Actually by the rich I was envisaging Brexiteers trying to pass the blame on to Remainers, who by and large are far better equipped to weather any financial down turn, which we've already witnessed here.

How many MP's do you think want there names associated with the Parliament which allowed the UK to fall out without a deal? Given their opinion of the potential consequences, it would be like volunteering for the antithesis of America's founding fathers... decades of scorn as commentators ask why Parliament didn't do it's constitutional duty and act in the best interests of the country once the truth became obvious... Given a binary option between WTO and not leaving I wouldn't back WTO, and given the fact that May has been playing to clock out in to WTO since she took over I wouldn't put money against that being the options left on the table either.

It was a good Conservative party then... but you make one small mistake and suddenly everybody is a critic... and the Theresa May Party is sooo bad Corbyn might actually win. It would almost be worth it just to see the look on her face.